If you oppose the Confederate flag you oppose the American flag too

[Ame®icano]

Lincoln started the war, moron, and it wasn't to free the slaves.

This is correct.

On Aug. 22, 1862, President Lincoln wrote a letter to the New York Tribune that included the following passage: “If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that. What I do about slavery and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union.”

 

[Nyvin]

Lincoln started the war, moron, and it wasn't to free the slaves.

This is correct.

On Aug. 22, 1862, President Lincoln wrote a letter to the New York Tribune that included the following passage: “If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that. What I do about slavery and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union.”

Once again, this goes against a common talking point on this forum that Republicans are "proud of Lincoln" and his anti-slavery heritage being a Republican, or something along that line.

 

[LeftofLeft]

Flags are offensive. Can't even wear the current US Flag to school or hang one in an apartment complex. Ban flags. They are oppressive to some people.

 

[Ame®icano]

Lincoln started the war, moron, and it wasn't to free the slaves.

This is correct.

On Aug. 22, 1862, President Lincoln wrote a letter to the New York Tribune that included the following passage: “If I could save the Union without freeing any slave, I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves, I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone, I would also do that. What I do about slavery and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union.”

Once again, this goes against a common talking point on this forum that Republicans are "proud of Lincoln" and his anti-slavery heritage being a Republican, or something along that line.

No it doesn't. Letter helps understanding that war was not started to end slavery, but to save the Union. However, unlike South, Republicans and north were always against slavery.

 

[Boss]

Let's face it. Southerners fought against Northern aggression and for their freedom. They were patriotic Americans sick of seeing their country going the wrong way. That's why people typically fly the Stars and Bars.
But we got over that and healed and the descendents of those Confederates went on to serve the American army and win our wars.
But those who want to censor, who want to denigrate the struggle of our Southern ancestors, who want to demonize others for holding opinions contrary to theirs are no better than jihhadis and communists, who want to ban anything contrary to their religion. They are the hater dupes of the public world.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The confederate states were united on one main issue; they were not willing to out-law slavery. If the United States of America outlawed slavery, they did not want to be part of the United States.
The flag represents pro-slavery and treason to the USA.
Most of those who fought for the South were victims of where they lived and a war their leaders chose to lead them in to. They can be honored for their loyalty to where they lived but the flag represents the slavery and treason their leaders promoted.

Hold on... NO ONE was willing to outlaw slavery because it hadn't been outlawed and no one had attempted outlawing it. The flag never represented pro-slavery or treason. These are misconceptions you've learned but they are wrong and you should educate yourself on the truth.

 

[IsaacNewton]

Let's face it. Southerners fought against Northern aggression and for their freedom. They were patriotic Americans sick of seeing their country going the wrong way. That's why people typically fly the Stars and Bars.
But we got over that and healed and the descendents of those Confederates went on to serve the American army and win our wars.
But those who want to censor, who want to denigrate the struggle of our Southern ancestors, who want to demonize others for holding opinions contrary to theirs are no better than jihhadis and communists, who want to ban anything contrary to their religion. They are the hater dupes of the public world.

you're ability to paint a war started to guarantee slavery as something noble is sickening.

Lincoln started the war, moron, and it wasn't to free the slaves.

lincoln didn't start a war. secession started the war.

Nope. Lincoln started it. No one forced Lincoln to invade Virginia, moron.

INGORANCE, thou are conservative.

- December 1860, shortly after Lincoln was elected South Carolina adopted an ordnance declaring its secession from the United States. SC demands the U.S. Army vacate its facilities.
- January 1861, President James Buchanan sent a supply ship to Fort Sumter in Charlestown bay, which was fired on by South Carolina forces.
- The U.S. Army refused to vacate Fort Sumter, South Carolina opens fire on the fort April 12, 1861.

I mean this isn't 1953. You do know you are using a thing called the internet and information is generally freely available to anyone that wants to look yes?

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Let's face it. Southerners fought against Northern aggression and for their freedom. They were patriotic Americans sick of seeing their country going the wrong way. That's why people typically fly the Stars and Bars.
But we got over that and healed and the descendents of those Confederates went on to serve the American army and win our wars.
But those who want to censor, who want to denigrate the struggle of our Southern ancestors, who want to demonize others for holding opinions contrary to theirs are no better than jihhadis and communists, who want to ban anything contrary to their religion. They are the hater dupes of the public world.

What a bunch of ridiculous unfounded tripe.

You're losing your mind before our very eyes on USMB

 

[ogibillm]

Let's face it. Southerners fought against Northern aggression and for their freedom. They were patriotic Americans sick of seeing their country going the wrong way. That's why people typically fly the Stars and Bars.
But we got over that and healed and the descendents of those Confederates went on to serve the American army and win our wars.
But those who want to censor, who want to denigrate the struggle of our Southern ancestors, who want to demonize others for holding opinions contrary to theirs are no better than jihhadis and communists, who want to ban anything contrary to their religion. They are the hater dupes of the public world.

What a bunch of ridiculous unfounded tripe.

You're losing your mind before our very eyes on USMB

you're too generous. he never had a mind to lose.

 

[OKTexas]

'Perpetual Union'.

Where is there "perpetual union." The preamble contains the word Posterity, which I think supports "no secession."
http://www.usconstitution.net/const.txt

No it doesn't. Not by any stretch of the imagination. For one thing, the preamble has no force of law.

The Supremacy Clause of the Constitution establishes the subordination of the States to federal law.

Only in the limited areas where the feds were granted power by the Constitution. Nothing more.

 

[OKTexas]

There have been debates over whether states have the right to secede from the US. Currently, the SCOTUS says they can't, but that was not the case in 1861 and it wasn't even settled after the Civil War. It has remained a constitutional question which has been highly debated through the years.

no, it's settled. texas v white, 1869. individual states cannot secede

It's "settled" only if you have a big appetite for horseshit. Lincoln put a majority of the justices on the court that made that decision.

it's settled if you follow the constitution. that's the case law clarifying the constitution. that's the law of the land.

What does it mean to "follow the Constitution." The decision may have the force of law, but that doesn't make it correct in any objective sense. Of course, the Nuremberg laws also had the force of law.

you're confused. secession is not permitted by the constitution. this is made clear in the texas v white case. when one adheres to, or follows the constitution, one knows that case law does not 'have the force of law' but is in fact clarification of existing law.

You have yet to post the article and clause texas v. white clarified.

 

[OKTexas]

LOL. The really ignorant thing about this tempest in a teapot is that one man on a hi-lift could have hung the Confederate Battle Flag at half mast in a matter of an hour or so, and there would have been zero controversy. Leaving it flying at full staff while the US and state flag were at half mast was an insult to much of the population of South Carolina.

State law on the memorial says the flag flies full mast or it's taken down, it does not allow for anything in between. That would require a legislative fix, which I think will happen.

 

[OKTexas]

Let's face it. Southerners fought against Northern aggression and for their freedom. They were patriotic Americans sick of seeing their country going the wrong way. That's why people typically fly the Stars and Bars.
But we got over that and healed and the descendents of those Confederates went on to serve the American army and win our wars.
But those who want to censor, who want to denigrate the struggle of our Southern ancestors, who want to demonize others for holding opinions contrary to theirs are no better than jihhadis and communists, who want to ban anything contrary to their religion. They are the hater dupes of the public world.

you're ability to paint a war started to guarantee slavery as something noble is sickening.

And you thinking you can judge people that lived in a different time by todays standards is equally sickening.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Today's standards of feeling slavery is horrifically wrong is a standard we should not apply to others? I think anyone who stands up for slavery at any point in history is SICK!!!

They were operating within the laws of the United States, ignorance is refusing to accept facts. I guess that's why your name is MUDD.

 

[OKTexas]

Roof's heinous act is just an excuse for the left to bash and attack the Confederate flag. The Confederate flag's original intended meaning had nothing to do with Roof's actions and disturbed beliefs.

the confederate flag was used to lead troops into battle in defense of slavery. you know, subjugation of one race by another. i think that ties in pretty well to roof's actions and beliefs.

Do you honestly believe the US only had black slaves? You really need to do some reading.

Google is your friend.

 

[bripat9643]

Let's face it. Southerners fought against Northern aggression and for their freedom. They were patriotic Americans sick of seeing their country going the wrong way. That's why people typically fly the Stars and Bars.
But we got over that and healed and the descendents of those Confederates went on to serve the American army and win our wars.
But those who want to censor, who want to denigrate the struggle of our Southern ancestors, who want to demonize others for holding opinions contrary to theirs are no better than jihhadis and communists, who want to ban anything contrary to their religion. They are the hater dupes of the public world.

you're ability to paint a war started to guarantee slavery as something noble is sickening.

Lincoln started the war, moron, and it wasn't to free the slaves.

lincoln didn't start a war. secession started the war.

Nope. Lincoln started it. No one forced Lincoln to invade Virginia, moron.

INGORANCE, thou are conservative.

- December 1860, shortly after Lincoln was elected South Carolina adopted an ordnance declaring its secession from the United States. SC demands the U.S. Army vacate its facilities.
- January 1861, President James Buchanan sent a supply ship to Fort Sumter in Charlestown bay, which was fired on by South Carolina forces.
- The U.S. Army refused to vacate Fort Sumter, South Carolina opens fire on the fort April 12, 1861.

I mean this isn't 1953. You do know you are using a thing called the internet and information is generally freely available to anyone that wants to look yes?

Ft Sumter was South Carolina territory, so the Union had no right to occupy it or resupply it.

The problem with the liberal version of history, is that large portions of it aren't true or they are based on faulty premises.

 

[bripat9643]

no, it's settled. texas v white, 1869. individual states cannot secede

It's "settled" only if you have a big appetite for horseshit. Lincoln put a majority of the justices on the court that made that decision.

it's settled if you follow the constitution. that's the case law clarifying the constitution. that's the law of the land.

What does it mean to "follow the Constitution." The decision may have the force of law, but that doesn't make it correct in any objective sense. Of course, the Nuremberg laws also had the force of law.

you're confused. secession is not permitted by the constitution. this is made clear in the texas v white case. when one adheres to, or follows the constitution, one knows that case law does not 'have the force of law' but is in fact clarification of existing law.

You have yet to post the article and clause texas v. white clarified.

It "clarified" the one libs invented from whole cloth that says states can't secede.

 

[IsaacNewton]

you're ability to paint a war started to guarantee slavery as something noble is sickening.

Lincoln started the war, moron, and it wasn't to free the slaves.

lincoln didn't start a war. secession started the war.

Nope. Lincoln started it. No one forced Lincoln to invade Virginia, moron.

INGORANCE, thou are conservative.

- December 1860, shortly after Lincoln was elected South Carolina adopted an ordnance declaring its secession from the United States. SC demands the U.S. Army vacate its facilities.
- January 1861, President James Buchanan sent a supply ship to Fort Sumter in Charlestown bay, which was fired on by South Carolina forces.
- The U.S. Army refused to vacate Fort Sumter, South Carolina opens fire on the fort April 12, 1861.

I mean this isn't 1953. You do know you are using a thing called the internet and information is generally freely available to anyone that wants to look yes?

Ft Sumter was South Carolina territory, so the Union had no right to occupy it or resupply it.

The problem with the liberal version of history, is that large portions of it aren't true or they are based on faulty premises.

Tell that to today's U.S. military when they try to resupply one of their bases in South Carolina. See how that goes.

 

[Faun]

you're ability to paint a war started to guarantee slavery as something noble is sickening.

Lincoln started the war, moron, and it wasn't to free the slaves.

lincoln didn't start a war. secession started the war.

Nope. Lincoln started it. No one forced Lincoln to invade Virginia, moron.

INGORANCE, thou are conservative.

- December 1860, shortly after Lincoln was elected South Carolina adopted an ordnance declaring its secession from the United States. SC demands the U.S. Army vacate its facilities.
- January 1861, President James Buchanan sent a supply ship to Fort Sumter in Charlestown bay, which was fired on by South Carolina forces.
- The U.S. Army refused to vacate Fort Sumter, South Carolina opens fire on the fort April 12, 1861.

I mean this isn't 1953. You do know you are using a thing called the internet and information is generally freely available to anyone that wants to look yes?

Ft Sumter was South Carolina territory, so the Union had no right to occupy it or resupply it.

The problem with the liberal version of history, is that large portions of it aren't true or they are based on faulty premises.

Stop lying. The territory was ceded to the U.S. How many times so you have to learn this until it seeps in?

Fort Sumter

Resolved That this State do cede to the United States all the right title and claim of South Carolina to the site of Fort Sumter and the requisite quantity of adjacent territory Provided That all processes civil and criminal issued under the authority of this State or any officer thereof shall and may be served and executed upon any of the land so ceded or structures to be erected upon the same and any person there being who may be implicated in law and that the said land site and structures enumerated shall be forever exempt from liability to pay any tax to this State Also resolved That the State will extinguish the claim if any valid claim there be of any individuals under the authority of this State to the land hereby ceded Also resolved That the Attorney General be instructed to investigate the claims of Wm Laval and others to the site at Fort Sumter and adjacent land contiguous thereto and if he shall be of opinion that these parties have a legal title to the said land that Generals Hamilton and Hayne and James I Pringle Thomas Bennett and Ker Boyce Esquires be appointed Commissioners on behalf of the State to appraise the value thereof If the Attorney General should be of opinion that the said title is not legal and valid that he proceed by scire facias or other proper legal proceedings to have the same avoided and that the Attorney General and the said Commissioners report to the Legislature at its next session Resolution of State Legislature passed Dec 21 1836 The foregoing resolution was recorded in book C No 11 page 310 etc in the register's office of mesne conveyances at Charleston July 9 1840​

 

[there4eyeM]

Articles of Confederation Transcript
The Articles of Confederation and the Perpetual Union

Constitution for the United States - We the People
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

 

[candycorn]

Then you explain to us all for our entertainment why the Council of Conservative Citizens is almost all Republicans today.[/QUOTE

so? south carolina seceded to protect slavery. what's hard about that concept?

And Lincoln invaded the south because he didn't think free men had a right to govern themselves, kind of unamerican wouldn't you say?

on the contrary. adherence to the constitution is american. making sure the seceding states adhered to the government they agreed upon is also american.

Right up to the point that government became something that wasn't agreed upon.

So, you're arguing that those who wanted nothing to do with America were the ones acting like Americans....

Put down the crack pipe.

More so than Lincoln. Have you ever read the declaration of independence?

Preserving America was un-American....got it.

The country was founded on the concept that a free people have the right to govern themselves, when you abandon those ideas you abandon America, and when America abandons those ideas it is no longer America. Any top down, dictatorial, central government is un-American.

Preserving America was un-American....got it.
and now....
Holding hundreds of thousands of black folks in bondage was not "dictatorial".

You keep digging...I'll keep handing you shovels.

Tell me, what laws were they violating by keeping slaves?

The laws of humanity and the laws of nature...then again most conservatives would not know much about them.